Appeal No. 1997-0330
Application 08/493,758
identically show the claimed electrolyte. Since there is
no identity, we reverse the rejection of claim 1 for
anticipation under '102.
Obviousness of Claim 1
The issue is whether Kirman renders obvious the
electrolyte of representative claim 1 wherein the
fluoride ion-yielding additives of the electrolyte
comprise "fluorine complexes having an optimum effective
fluoride content that corresponds to the maximum
solubility of the additives and wherein the fluoride
complex is present in concentrations exceeding its
solubility product." According to the specification (p.
3), such a concentration is selected to obtain "a
relatively, constant active substance [i.e., fluoride
complex]" in the electrolyte. In other words, the
fluoride complex is in the electrolyte at a concentration
that exceeds the amount needed to maintain the plating
process. According to appellants (brief, p. 10), Kirman
does not disclose this excess level of fluoride complex
and contend that by requiring the fluoride complex to be
5
Page: Previous 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 Next
Last modified: November 3, 2007